[billyu2]

I would say the dribble has not ended (therefore by rule the term "interrupted dribble"). If A1 were to get to the ball and continue the dribble, the interrupted dribble ends and the original dribble continues. But in the OP A1 dives on the floor and possesses the ball ending both the interrupted dribble and the original dribble. During the interrupted dribble I would think A1 is no longer a dribbler because certain rules no longer apply to the situation or to A1 that would apply if A1 was a dribbler. (See 4-15-6) And, as j.a.r. said, the 3 pts. issue would not apply either if A1 was not a dribbler. So, as I see it, we have a situation (interrupted dribble, no player control) but while in Team A control, the ball goes from the back court to the front court and then is touched by A1 whose location is in the back court which results in a violation. What has been confusing to me is the wording in Rule 9-9-2: "While in player and team control in the back court a player shall not cause the ball to go from the back court to the front court and return to the back court . . . Which seems to imply there must be both player and team control which is not the case in an interrupted dribble. To me, it would be more accurate if the wording said: "While in player or team control in the back court . . .